By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Olympic organizers are investigating after several athletes reported their newly won medals broke off their ribbons within hours of receiving them. Gold medalist Breezy Johnson and biathlete Justus Strelow are among those whose medals have detached, prompting concerns about the craftsmanship. The Milan Cortina organizing committee has stated they are addressing the issue with utmost attention, as the medal represents a significant moment for the athletes. This follows similar quality issues with medals at the 2024 Paris Summer Olympics.
Read the original article here
It’s quite something when the pinnacle of athletic achievement, the Olympic medal, seems to falter under the sheer joy of victory. Reports have surfaced that some athletes are experiencing their hard-won medals breaking or showing signs of wear and tear remarkably quickly, sometimes within hours of receiving them. This isn’t just a minor inconvenience; it’s a blemish on an event that’s supposed to represent the absolute best, both in human performance and in the symbols of those triumphs. The very idea that these prestigious awards could be so fragile, falling apart during the exuberant celebrations, raises eyebrows and sparks conversations about quality and value.
One of the recurring themes in discussions about these medal mishaps is the apparent cost-cutting involved. When you think of Olympic medals, especially gold ones, the image conjured is one of immense value, both intrinsic and symbolic. Yet, the way these medals are detaching from their ribbons, particularly during moments of intense celebration like jumping for joy, suggests that perhaps the budget for these iconic pieces wasn’t as robust as one would expect. It’s a perplexing notion to consider that an event of such global significance might resort to compromises on the very awards that represent its highest ideals. The embarrassment for the Olympics, an institution that thrives on its prestige, seems palpable.
However, delving a bit deeper into the comments and observations, it becomes clear that the issue might not be the medals themselves shattering or splitting in half, which would indeed be catastrophic. Instead, the focus seems to be on the ribbons or lanyards that hold these weighty symbols of achievement. It appears that these attachment mechanisms are proving to be the weak link, failing under the strain of enthusiastic movement. While the medal itself remains intact, its ability to be proudly displayed and worn is compromised when the means of its suspension gives way. This points to a design flaw, an irksome one at that, which unfortunately mars the celebratory experience for some athletes.
The notion that “every Olympics, the medals suck in some new way” is a sentiment that seems to resonate with some observers. It implies a recurring pattern of issues, leading to the question of why host countries, entrusted with such a monumental event, wouldn’t prioritize absolute quality for their medals. The argument that the cost of gold might have necessitated some form of expense reduction is a plausible, albeit disappointing, explanation. The fact that these awards, meant to be symbols of enduring excellence, are facing questions about their durability is, frankly, embarrassing.
It’s important to clarify that the core problem, as many have pointed out, isn’t the medal’s material integrity but rather the ribbon or clasp’s inability to withstand typical celebratory actions. The articles, and by extension, the broader discussion, are often about medals falling off due to the breaking of these connecting elements. This distinction is crucial; while the actual medals aren’t disintegrating, their function as wearable awards is being compromised. The idea that they might have splurged on other aspects of the games, like mascots, while skimping on the quality of the lanyards, adds a layer of almost comical absurdity to the situation.
The suggestion that the ribbons are akin to free lanyards one might receive at a corporate event, with some being so thin you can see through them, paints a stark picture. It’s difficult to reconcile this image with the gravitas of an Olympic medal. The expectation is that these attachments should be robust enough to handle the weight of the medal and the inevitable vigorous movements of a joyous athlete. The idea of having to “cancel their Temu order earlier” is a humorous, albeit pointed, jab at the perceived low quality of the materials used.
The situation begs the question of why these medals aren’t standardized in their construction and durability across all Olympic games. One would assume that a certain benchmark of quality would be non-negotiable. The observation that this situation perfectly encapsulates a broader perception of the Olympics as a potentially “broken, cheap, trinket that lost its value years ago” is a harsh but perhaps telling critique for some. It speaks to a cynicism that emerges when symbols of greatness appear to be treated with less reverence than expected.
Andrea Francisi, the chief games operations officer for the Milan Cortina organizing committee, has acknowledged the situation, stating they are investigating the issue. However, the tone of some comments suggests a concern that the blame might be implicitly shifted towards the athletes for their enthusiastic celebrations, rather than addressing the “shoddy construction” of the medals’ attachments. It’s a delicate balance, of course; even the most robust medals might not withstand extreme abuse. However, the expectation is that they should endure the natural expressions of triumph.
The very act of athletes being advised not to jump while wearing their medals, lest they break, is a rather disheartening paradox. It implies a fragility that is antithetical to the spirit of athletic achievement. One would hope that the awards themselves would be designed to endure the very celebrations they inspire. The comparison to biting them, as was a tradition for a long time, further highlights the perceived disconnect between the historical significance and current perceived quality.
Ultimately, the focus of the concern is the ribbon or clasp failing, leading to the medal detaching. While the actual medal might not be breaking, the practical outcome is the same: a compromised symbol of victory. It’s a simple fix in theory, but the fact that it’s happening at the Olympic level is what raises the most questions. It leaves one wondering about the sourcing and manufacturing processes. As one commenter wryly puts it, “Please unplug it and plug it in again,” a classic IT troubleshooting step applied to a rather more physical and symbolic problem, highlighting the absurdity of the situation. The sheer cost of gold is often cited as a reason for potential compromises, leading to speculation that the lowest bidders were likely engaged for their production. The idea of these being akin to chocolate coins wrapped in foil, while humorous, underscores the deep disappointment when the reality falls far short of expectation. If a medal can’t withstand a joyous leap, it raises serious questions about its design, durability, and the value placed on the athletes’ hard-earned achievements.